Is There a Standard Adjuvant Therapy for Resected Pancreatic Cancer?

Surgical resection remains the only treatment that offers a potential chance of long-term survival. Unfortunately, about 80% of patients treated with curative intent will develop recurrence. Since 2001, adjuvant therapy with gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracyle was recommended. This approach allows a median overall survival (OS) of around 23 months, and 5-year survival of 22%. In recent years, two phase-3 trials investigating new chemotherapy regimens resulted in considerably improved survival times. The doublet gemcitabine–capecitabine has shown improvement in OS from 25.5 to 28 months (p = 0.032) compared to gemcitabine, in the ESPAC-4 trial. Later, preliminary results of PRODIGE 24 trial presented at the 2018 ASCO meeting showed a superiority of a combination chemotherapy regimen with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) when compared to gemcitabine alone, both in terms of median disease-free survival (21.6 vs. 12.8 months, p < 0.0001) and OS (54.4 vs. 35 months, p = 0.003). Contrary to chemotherapy, the role of adjuvant radiotherapy is still controversial, even in the case of R1 surgery. A randomized trial exploring the role of chemoradiotherapy in this setting is now ongoing in the US (RTOG-0848). Overall, the management of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma is evolving. In this review, we summarize the current status and the most up-to-date developments in adjuvant treatment

Pursuit of Gene Fusions in Daily Practice: Evidence from Real-World Data in Wild-Type and Microsatellite Instable Patients

Agnostic biomarkers such as gene fusions allow to address cancer patients to targeted therapies; however, the low prevalence of these alterations across common malignancies poses challenges and needs a feasible and sensitive diagnostic process. RNA-based targeted next generation sequencing was performed on 125 samples of patients affected either by colorectal carcinoma, melanoma, or lung adenocarcinoma lacking genetic alterations in canonical driver genes, or by a colorectal carcinoma with microsatellite instability. Gene fusion rates were compared with in silico data from MSKCC datasets. For NTRK gene fusion detection we also employed a multitarget qRT-PCR and pan-TRK immunohistochemistry. Gene fusions were detected in 7/55 microsatellite instable colorectal carcinomas (12.73%), and in 4/70 of the “gene driver free” population (5.71%: 3/28 melanomas, 10.7%, and 1/12 lung adenocarcinomas, 8.3%). Fusion rates were significantly higher compared with the microsatellite stable and “gene driver positive” MSKCC cohorts. Pan-TRK immunohistochemistry showed 100% sensitivity, 91.7% specificity, and the occurrence of heterogeneous and/or subtle staining patterns. The enrichment of gene fusions in this “real-world” cohort highlights the feasibility of a workflow applicable in clinical practice. The heterogeneous expression in NTRK fusion positive tumours unveils challenging patterns to recognize and raises questions on the effective translation of the chimeric protein

Retrospective Study of Regorafenib Versus TAS-102 Efficacy and Safety in Chemorefractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) Patients: A Multi-institution Real Life Clinical Data

INTRODUCTION: There have been significant developments in colorectal cancer (CRC) research over the last few years, with the introduction of new agents that have been prolonged median overall survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). These therapies have improved patient outcomes; however, despite significant progress in strategies for cancer treatment, their use is limited by development of resistant mechanism. Almost 30% of patients with refractory mCRC will remain good candidates for further treatment. Regorafenib and TAS-102 are novel antitumor agents for patients with refractory mCRC. However, it is unclear which patients may derive a survival benefit from these drugs in real-life clinical practice.; METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis evaluating safety and efficacy of TAS-102 and regorafenib in a cohort of refractory mCRC patients, in 3 different centers between January 1 2018 and May 31 2020, with the aim of assessing the optimal sequence treatment for these 2 drugs.; RESULTS: One hundred and forty mCRC patients were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 64 received regorafenib and 76 received TAS-102 as first treatment. After progression, in the regorafenib 24 (37%) patients switched to secondary treatment with TAS-102, instead, in the TAS-102 group, among 76 patients, 29 (45%) patients switched to secondary treatment with regorafenib. Disease control was achieved in 8 (12.5%) of 64 patients in the regorafenib group and 17 (22.4%) of 76 patients in the TAS-102 group. In terms of efficacy, the PFS and OS were similar in both treatment groups for primary and secondary treatments. AEs reported in this analysis were mostly consistent with the known safety profiles of regorafenib and TAS-102 in previous clinical trials.; CONCLUSION: The present study is the first one to compare the activity of the two agents in a large cohort of chemo-refractory mCRC patients providing more details about the best sequence, to be incorporated in clinical practice. Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Prognostic and predictive role of EGFR pathway alterations in biliary cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and anti-EGFR

The association of anti-EGFR to gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) chemotherapy did not improve survival in biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) patients. Multiple mechanisms might be involved in the resistance to anti-EGFR. Here, we explored the mutation profile of EGFR extracellular domain (ECD), of tyrosine kinase domain (TKD), and its amplification status. EGFR mutational status of exons 12, 18-21 was analyzed in 57 tumors by Sanger sequencing. EGFR amplification was evaluated in 37 tumors by Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH). Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated using the log-rank test. Six patients had mutations in exon 12 of EGFR ECD and 7 in EGFR TKD. Neither EGFR ECD nor TKD mutations affected progression free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) in the entire population. In the panitumumab plus GEMOX (P-GEMOX) arm, ECD mutated patients had a worse OS, while EGFR TKD mutated patients had a trend towards shorter PFS and OS. Overall, the presence of mutations in EGFR or in its transducers did not affect PFS or OS, while the extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) mutated patients had a worse prognosis compared to WT. Nineteen out of 37 tumors were EGFR amplified, but the amplification did not correlate with survival. ECC EGFR amplified patients had improved OS, whereas the amplification significantly correlated with poor PFS (p = 0.03) in gallbladder carcinoma patients. The high molecular heterogeneity is a predominant feature of BTC: the alterations found in this work seem to have a prognostic impact rather than a predictive role towards anti-EGFR therapy

Association of immune-related adverse events with the outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) show a tremendous activity in microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but a consistent fraction of patients does not respond. Prognostic/predictive markers are needed. Despite previous investigations in other tumor types, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have not been well evaluated in patients with MSI-H cancers treated with ICIs. Methods: We conducted an international cohort study at tertiary cancer centers collecting clinic-pathological features from 331 patients with MSI-H mCRC treated with ICIs. Of note, the irAEs were summarized using a 'burden score' constructed in a way that the same score value could be obtained by cumulating many low-grade irAEs or few high-grade irAEs; as a result, the lower the burden the better. Clearly, the irAE burden is not a baseline information, thus it was modeled as a time-dependent variable in univariable and multivariable Cox models. Results: Among 331 patients, irAEs were reported in 144 (43.5%) patients. After a median follow-up time of 29.7 months, patients with higher burden of skin, endocrine and musculoskeletal irAEs (the latter two's effect was confirmed at multivariable analysis) had longer overall survival (OS), as opposed to gastrointestinal, pneumonitis, neurological, liver, renal and other irAEs, which showed an harmful effect. Similar results were observed for progression-free survival (PFS). Based on the results retrieved from organ-specific irAEs, 'aggregated' burden scores were developed to distinguish 'protective' (endocrine and musculoskeletal) and 'harmful' (gastrointestinal, pneumonitis, neurological, hepatic) irAEs showing prognostic effects on OS and PFS. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that not all irAEs could exert a protective effect on oncologic outcome. An easy-to-use model for ICIs toxicity (burden score of protective and harmful irAEs) may be used as surrogate marker of response